With the exception of merging recordings between two editions of the same album (for which obviously I don’t have them), to unclutter the artist recording lists, and to keep testing my most popular user script.
What I like most is editing my releases.
I could not imagine editing MB without having the releases. It would be pointless for me. No motivation.
More than 2/3 of my release edits: I have it. And most of the time, I do listen to it, yes, while editing.
Sometimes I had to play several tracks to make sure I could merge recordings where there was some doubts about them, and I’m not alone doing so.
I have also simultaneously watched two ripped videos (in several occasions) from two of my DVD to know if I can merge.
It’s important because most of the mistakes I’ve made was on things I don’t own.
Sometimes, there are unsuspected different audio or of different video.
You must be better at resisting the rabbit hole effect than I am. The vast majority of what I edit started out related to things I own, but I often end up far afield, working on things I stumbled over in the meantime that had obvious problems to fix. Like this release that had work credits in the titles, or my larger project which led me there, which has been getting as many of the mis-attributed “Traveling Wilburys” recordings from bootlegs cleaned up as possible.
Except for help with merging and a little info related to performers, how much info do you actually get from listening that goes into the database? The vast majority comes from the packaging, right?
I edit stuff I listen to that I own or not. I like hip hop music so I edit that. I also edit albums by artists from my part of the world (Québec). I like to listen to new albums every fridays and usually add one or two new albums to MusicBrainz that I listen to (from streaming services).
I while back I was fixing the work relations for you, and I went and tracked down every single linked recording and gave it a listen in order to figure out which variant of song lyrics was used (some new recordings have been linked since then).
I usually ear check when linking works if there is any doubt. However since the Japanese are so very good at tracking this info usually there is no doubt for what I edit.
To answer the question posed by the title of this thread, I am usually listening to what I edit and I am usually editing releases in my collection.
95% of the stuff I’m editing, I do so that I can tag it in Picard. So, I edit what I listen to
I would love to add data beyond just my collection, but I think the current editing process is too inefficient to make this fun for me. Overall, I wish there were fewer page loads and clicks necessary to get a basic release (tracklist, basic metadata, basic recording relationships, cover art, genre) into the database. Using the website through a browser feels too slow at times (waiting until the server has rendered the page). In contrast, the parts of MB that Picard interacts with are refreshingly snappy.
Like @jesus2099, and many of you, most of what I am editing is triggered by listening to an album. Yesterday I put on some Gil Scott-Heron, and was horrified at the lack of works that were linked on his section. So while putting on various of his albums I had to clean up. Wikipedia \ Discogs filling in the gaps when I didn’t have the albums to hand. 600 or so edits later and we have all his albums properly linked to writing credits.
The beauty of this is learning so much more about an artist and their work in the process. Reading deeper into Wiki \ Discogs and album covers. Or chasing down some obscure fact on a fan website. MB brings so much more to my music because of this.
And I often hit @psychoadept’s rabbit holes of obscurity. Chasing some link off to some related artist who plays a trumpet on one track… and boom away we go on the research. MB fills out my knowledge and enjoyment of the music, and sends me into listening and buying tunes I hadn’t thought of. (Yes, I have purchased releases just so I could fill in data on MB…)
At the heart I fill in the data to improve my tags, but that then spreads to needing to be a completest and get as many writing credits into place as I can. Or gig and recording locations… and then share that full circle back into MB.
And I often edit artists I don’t have anything of at all. That OCD side of wanting things to be correct \ complete… but it also means I end up listening to that artist on YouTube or even buying their works.
I most definitely listen to the releases I edit and I edit what I listen to, given that I own a physical copy (I do not edit listening from online sources, unless I have them in the mail). I really enjoy seeing my work show up on my monitor when I play my albums and I make corrections as soon as I spot them.
Cataloguing my music through MB has meant I have played so much more of my collection and rediscover so much of my own music. Sometimes I had “collected” but forgotten to listen to it. And I listen to tracks in so much more detail. Including @jesus2099’s double track playback…
I ended up listening to a bunch of Roy Orbison lately, in conjunction with trying to source some bootleg tracks. Had to download tracks off three different (official) albums to help tease apart the tangle of acoustids. I didn’t figure it all out, but I at least identified with some confidence the most common acoutids belonging to the 1987 version of In Dreams, lol.
And a joyful journey you no doubt had while just trying to sort out a few pesky AcoustIDs. I certainly recognise that journey. A journey that reveals so much more in the music I’d never have noticed before.
but it also means I end up listening to that artist on YouTube or even buying their works.
I certainly recognise that journey. A journey that reveals so much more in the music I’d never have noticed before.